• Conspiracy hobbyist lunacy isn't limited to JFK's assassination

    From John Corbett@21:1/5 to All on Sat Oct 7 07:30:27 2023
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/evidence-proves-one-of-the-most-impactful-events-in-history-was-a-lie/ar-AA1hJyOv?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=c286cb42264b4eccbe314305a3cdb6f3&ei=21

    Some assclowns claim that the fact Armstrong's and Aldrin's boots don't
    match the photos of their lunar footprints is proof the moon landings were a hoax. It's the classic conspiracist tactic of looking at evidence in isolation and offering up whataboutism. The simple truth of the matter, as explained
    in the article, is that during the trek on the moon, the astronauts wore overshoes which left footprints different from their main boots. Those overshoes and a lot of other materials were left behind on the moon because they were not needed on the return voyage and weight had to be reduced to allow lunar soil and rock samples to be gathered and still leave the LEM light
    enough to take off from the surface of the moon.

    Conspiracy hobbyists never want to find answers to their asinine questions. They think they can make their point simply by raising the questions without finding out what the answers are. It's a silly hobby no matter what the subject is.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bud@21:1/5 to John Corbett on Sat Oct 7 07:56:38 2023
    On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 10:30:29 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/evidence-proves-one-of-the-most-impactful-events-in-history-was-a-lie/ar-AA1hJyOv?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=c286cb42264b4eccbe314305a3cdb6f3&ei=21

    Some assclowns claim that the fact Armstrong's and Aldrin's boots don't match the photos of their lunar footprints is proof the moon landings were a hoax. It's the classic conspiracist tactic of looking at evidence in isolation
    and offering up whataboutism. The simple truth of the matter, as explained in the article, is that during the trek on the moon, the astronauts wore overshoes which left footprints different from their main boots. Those overshoes and a lot of other materials were left behind on the moon because they were not needed on the return voyage and weight had to be reduced to allow lunar soil and rock samples to be gathered and still leave the LEM light
    enough to take off from the surface of the moon.

    Conspiracy hobbyists never want to find answers to their asinine questions. They think they can make their point simply by raising the questions without finding out what the answers are. It's a silly hobby no matter what the subject
    is.

    Yes, I would have never caught that discrepancy in a million years (and if I did, "different shoes" would have been the most obvious possibility, far outweighing the idea of a massive conspiracy and coverup). It takes the hunt conducted by a hobbyist
    desperate to find "clues" to support what they want to believe. Then someone else has the burden to set things right. You see this with the 9-11 Truthers, there isn`t a single photo or video that a conspiracy fanatic can`t find something fishy, some clue
    to what "really" happened. Not at the twin towers, not of Tower 7, not of the Pentagon, not the plane that crashed in rural Pennsylvania (I remember them saying "How could the engine end up where it did?" at that site, typical burden shifting). The mere
    fact that these hobbyists see the hand of conspiracy *everywhere* shows that it is a hobby driven by desperation. And the same thing applies to the JFK assassination hobby, "clues" can be found in most of the photos (the blurrier the better), in the
    police and FBI reports, at Oswald`s boardinghouse and the Paine`s house, 10th and Patton, The Texas Theater, in the pursuit of Oswald after he killed Tippit and Oswald`s flight from the TSBD and in the testimony of just about all of Oswald`s co-workers. *
    EVERYWHERE*, there is no area that some "clue" can`t be found. Clues for the clueless, desperate to find justification for their childish beliefs. But can they put these "clues" together into some tangible, coherent package to show what really happened?
    Heck no. It is like the took one jigsaw piece from a hundred different jigsaw puzzles and they just have ended up with a bunch of random pieces that can`t be made into anything.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Donald Willis@21:1/5 to John Corbett on Sat Oct 7 08:53:01 2023
    On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 7:30:29 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/evidence-proves-one-of-the-most-impactful-events-in-history-was-a-lie/ar-AA1hJyOv?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=c286cb42264b4eccbe314305a3cdb6f3&ei=21

    Some assclowns claim that the fact Armstrong's and Aldrin's boots don't match the photos of their lunar footprints is proof the moon landings were a hoax. It's the classic conspiracist tactic of looking at evidence in isolation
    and offering up whataboutism. The simple truth of the matter, as explained in the article, is that during the trek on the moon, the astronauts wore overshoes which left footprints different from their main boots. Those overshoes and a lot of other materials were left behind on the moon because they were not needed on the return voyage and weight had to be reduced to allow lunar soil and rock samples to be gathered and still leave the LEM light
    enough to take off from the surface of the moon.

    My favorite element of moon-trip conspiracy "thinking": Stanley Kubrick did the space scenes. I'm sure he got a chuckle out of that...


    Conspiracy hobbyists never want to find answers to their asinine questions. They think they can make their point simply by raising the questions without finding out what the answers are. It's a silly hobby no matter what the subject
    is.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Corbett@21:1/5 to Bud on Sat Oct 7 08:54:12 2023
    On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 10:56:40 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
    On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 10:30:29 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/evidence-proves-one-of-the-most-impactful-events-in-history-was-a-lie/ar-AA1hJyOv?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=c286cb42264b4eccbe314305a3cdb6f3&ei=21

    Some assclowns claim that the fact Armstrong's and Aldrin's boots don't match the photos of their lunar footprints is proof the moon landings were a
    hoax. It's the classic conspiracist tactic of looking at evidence in isolation
    and offering up whataboutism. The simple truth of the matter, as explained in the article, is that during the trek on the moon, the astronauts wore overshoes which left footprints different from their main boots. Those overshoes and a lot of other materials were left behind on the moon because
    they were not needed on the return voyage and weight had to be reduced to allow lunar soil and rock samples to be gathered and still leave the LEM light
    enough to take off from the surface of the moon.

    Conspiracy hobbyists never want to find answers to their asinine questions.
    They think they can make their point simply by raising the questions without
    finding out what the answers are. It's a silly hobby no matter what the subject
    is.
    Yes, I would have never caught that discrepancy in a million years (and if I did, "different shoes" would have been the most obvious possibility, far outweighing the idea of a massive conspiracy and coverup). It takes the hunt conducted by a hobbyist
    desperate to find "clues" to support what they want to believe. Then someone else has the burden to set things right. You see this with the 9-11 Truthers, there isn`t a single photo or video that a conspiracy fanatic can`t find something fishy, some clue
    to what "really" happened. Not at the twin towers, not of Tower 7, not of the Pentagon, not the plane that crashed in rural Pennsylvania (I remember them saying "How could the engine end up where it did?" at that site, typical burden shifting). The mere
    fact that these hobbyists see the hand of conspiracy *everywhere* shows that it is a hobby driven by desperation. And the same thing applies to the JFK assassination hobby, "clues" can be found in most of the photos (the blurrier the better), in the
    police and FBI reports, at Oswald`s boardinghouse and the Paine`s house, 10th and Patton, The Texas Theater, in the pursuit of Oswald after he killed Tippit and Oswald`s flight from the TSBD and in the testimony of just about all of Oswald`s co-workers. *
    EVERYWHERE*, there is no area that some "clue" can`t be found. Clues for the clueless, desperate to find justification for their childish beliefs. But can they put these "clues" together into some tangible, coherent package to show what really happened?
    Heck no. It is like the took one jigsaw piece from a hundred different jigsaw puzzles and they just have ended up with a bunch of random pieces that can`t be made into anything.

    "Clues for the clueless". Great expression. I'll have to recycle that one.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to All on Mon Oct 9 07:16:25 2023
    On Sat, 7 Oct 2023 07:56:38 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirslick@fast.net>
    wrote:


    So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
    "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?

    Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question. He knows
    that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
    get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.

    It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
    where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)

    So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to geowright1963@gmail.com on Mon Oct 9 07:16:25 2023
    On Sat, 7 Oct 2023 07:30:27 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
    <geowright1963@gmail.com> wrote:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/evidence-proves-one-of-the-most-impactful-events-in-history-was-a-lie/ar-AA1hJyOv?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=c286cb42264b4eccbe314305a3cdb6f3&ei=21

    Some assclowns claim that the fact Armstrong's and Aldrin's boots don't
    match the photos of their lunar footprints is proof the moon landings were a >hoax. It's the classic conspiracist tactic of looking at evidence in isolation >and offering up whataboutism. The simple truth of the matter, as explained
    in the article, is that during the trek on the moon, the astronauts wore >overshoes which left footprints different from their main boots. Those >overshoes and a lot of other materials were left behind on the moon because >they were not needed on the return voyage and weight had to be reduced to allow lunar soil and rock samples to be gathered and still leave the LEM light
    enough to take off from the surface of the moon.

    Conspiracy hobbyists never want to find answers to their asinine questions. >They think they can make their point simply by raising the questions without >finding out what the answers are. It's a silly hobby no matter what the subject
    is.

    Can you name this logical fallacy?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)